Bill Tieleman is one of BC's best known communicators, political commentators and strategists.
Bill is a political panelist regularly on CBC Radio and TV in BC and with other media.
Bill has been Communications Director in the B.C. Premier's Office and at the BC Federation of Labour.
Bill owns West Star Communications, a consulting firm providing strategy and communication services for labour, business, non-profits and government.

Tuesday, April 09, 2013

Why negative political attack advertising fails - and why the BC Liberals are taking dangerous chances using it

New
Democrat leader Adrian Dix is taking the biggest political risk of his life --
and his party will win or lose this election because of it.

No,
it's not by promising
well in advance that an NDP government would increase the corporate tax rates
or put a minimum tax on banks and financial institutions nor is it an
ill-advised policy in the party's forthcoming platform.

Dix
rolled the dice a year ago when he publicly pledged the NDP will not
run negative or personal attack ads, period.

The
NDP has not and will not respond in kind to the vicious $1 million
assault on Dix's own character launched by Concerned Citizens for
BC, a BC Liberal-linked group led by Jim Shepard, an ex-Christy Clark advisor
and former corporate CEO.

But
is Dix being risky or is it really Clark's team taking dangerous chances by
gambling everything on the success of negative advertising?

After
all, the NDP is 20 points ahead of the BC Liberals and Dix's approval rating is
miles ahead of Clark's, according to the last Angus Reid poll.

The
focus on negative ads may be because while political operatives strongly
believe negative advertising works, those who actually empirically study
advertising for a living say the research tells a different story.

Confused
consultants

"Everyone
remembers the races where a negative attack or series of attacks appears to
have been decisive. That's the kind of knowledge candidates and consultants
have -- it's anecdotal evidence. The scholarly evidence doesn't back them
up," says Stephen Craig, professor of political science at the University
of Florida.

"Here's
the deal -- why are there so many negative ads? Because candidates and
consultants believe they work," Craig says.

"If
you've got a powerful negative message that resonates with voters, then yeah,
it's going to work. But if it's about something voters don't care about, if
it's a message that's poorly presented, then they're not going to be moved by
it."

"Can
it work? Yes. Does it work? Sometimes," Craig sums up.

Another
expert who has done the research says policy trumps so-called
"character" issues time after time.

"It
would seem that the candidate who talks more about policy may be more likely to
win," says Bill Benoit, an Ohio University communication studies professor
who studies
negative political advertising.

"We
found public opinion data from 1980 through 2000 where they asked voters what's
the most important determinant of your vote for president and more people said
policy or issues than character or image."

"So
in fact, the candidates who talk more about policy are more likely to win than
if you stress character," Benoit concludes.

Familiar
weapon, new era

I
know firsthand that negative advertising can work very well -- because I was
Premier Glen Clark's communications director when our NDP campaign used it
against then-opposition leader Gordon Campbell in 1996. And my colleague then
was Clark's chief of staff, Adrian Dix.

The
NDP launched a pre-emptive negative TV advertising strike against Campbell that
started before Clark was even chosen leader in Feb. 1996.

Those
ads, brilliantly created by NOW Communications, featured grainy black and white
photos of a scary Campbell with an ominous deep male announcer's voice talking
about BC Liberal plans to slash public services, then asking: "Gordon
Campbell: Whose side is he on anyway?"

In
the election campaign that followed, the NDP slogan was "On Your Side"
and it was illustrated by the government freezing tuition fees, BC Ferries'
fares, ICBC auto insurance rates and increasing the minimum wage.

All
of that was counter posed to Campbell's agenda to cut 15 per cent from the BC
budget, sell BC Rail, reduce the number of rural seats in the BC Legislature
and generally shake up the province.

The
BC Liberals ill-advised slogan -- "The Courage To Change" -- even
reinforced the NDP message that bad things would happen if Campbell were
elected.

The
combination of heavy negative advertising against the BC Liberals – who
initially held a 30-point lead -- and positive action by the NDP government
combined to give Glen Clark a stunning upset victory.

'We
need to bring people back to politics': Dix

Clark
won more seats but fewer votes than Campbell's battered crew.

But
the approach Dix takes to politics today has evolved since 1996.

"A
lot of people think the way to respond to negative ads is to run negative ads
ourselves," Dix told
the Parksville Qualicum Beach news last May.

"The
reason we are not going to do this is very simple. First, 1.7 million people
didn't vote in the last provincial election.

"We
are not going to bring anybody back to politics by deciding the winner of an
election is the person with the best ad agency to run the nastiest negative
ads. We need to bring people back to politics and that means offering some hope
that change will happen," Dix argued.

And
despite being the target of extensive personal attack ads, Dix has not wavered.

For
their part, the BC Liberals surprisingly say they aren't going to go negative
either.

Mike
McDonald, the BC Liberal Party campaign director, claims his team is going to
play nice.

"We're
not going to run a nasty campaign," he told
The Province's Michael Smyth.

"A
campaign is where you debate. You talk about your strengths and your opponent's
weaknesses. That's what we intend to do and we'll do it in a very fair, honest
and factual way," McDonald says.

But
even if McDonald is correct, he leaves unsaid the role of CC4BC and possibly
other BC Liberal supporters running third party advertising.

Big
turn-off

Regardless
of that, other academic research should also concern the BC Liberals and their
ad buying allies in CC4BC because it shows that increased repetition of
negative advertising has the reverse effect on voters -- they are turned right
off by it.

A
new study
out last month showed participants a series of ads, including negative
political attack ads.

The
study found that "after three exposures, participants had more favorable
opinions of the candidate who sponsored the ad. But, after five airings,
viewers' opinions became increasingly negative."

Juliana
Fernandes, an assistant professor at the University of Miami in Florida who
specializes in political communication, conducted the research and cautions
that those using negative ads "should use negative ads strategically, not
overwhelmingly."

Whoops
-- that doesn't seem to have been the CC4BC approach with its carpet-bombing
negative ad campaign.

But
don't just blame political parties and advocacy groups for going negative –
blame the media, says Benoit, who has extensively studied both American and
international elections.

"We
know that news coverage is always more negative than the candidates and the
news coverage does not emphasize policy as much as the candidates do – the news
focuses on horserace first and then character," Benoit argues persuasively.

Will
Dix's boycott of negative advertising not only help the BC NDP win the election
but also change the channel from nasty politics to policy?

If
so, Dix will become the second B.C. opposition leader to easily win an election
without running a single negative attack ad. Ironically the first was Gordon
Campbell in his 2001 landslide victory over the NDP.

19 comments:

DPL
said...

As the Private eye on TV used to say. "Gimme the facts mam". If you have somethings to hide , you never tell the truth but try to cover the mess with some candy. If the truth isn't about to hurt you, use it every time. Dix is doing it right, Clark is just babbling

Friday: Just the facts, Ma'am.No, attack ads are not a sure thing, per se. They're probably ineffective when produced perfunctorily and definitely risky for the perpetrator about whom the electorate has already formed a negative opinion. The BC Liberals began their popular slide after corrupting the BC Rail corruption trial because it looked like they had something to hide. Their 2009 deficit lie, the HST lie, trying to frustrate the Anti-HST petition by (mis-) appointing a partisan Chief Electoral Officer, even Christy breaking her early election promise all tend to compound BC Liberals' reputation for dishonesty and are all available and recent enough (in an unbroken-chain sense) to work their cognitive bias. The ads run the risk of neatly confirming that reputation of dishonesty.

Character assassins and advertising berserkers don't normally highlight the attacker or invite comparison between target and perpetrator. Unfortunately for the BC Liberals, their attack ads do just that, so when they attack Dix's integrity they actually invite a closer look at their own and consequently suffer from the immediately startling contrast.

Being hoist upon one's own petard means being unintentionally, but probably deservedly, blown up by one's own bomb. BC Liberal attack ads hurt them more than they hurt Dix and, being so far back in the polls, make them doubly stupid.

They are a double edged sword, but are more of a lame excuse of not selling what is you stand for.

The NDP actually ended up less in the popular vote than the BC Liberals at the time (1996), but won more seats so hence another term of NDP.

Comparing the two types, the negative ads are more on creative ways to eck out a message, with many not based on facts.

The NDP would be wise not to get too heavy into the negative ads.

In 1991, Social Credit had negative ads and materials against the NDP, and they did not work at all.

The federal Conservatives had negative ads against Chretien and that proved to be a disaster.

Dix is doing it right, although weak at this point on what it is he and his collective are wanting to do as government.

The negative ads against Campbell in 1996, were from a different time, and even the BC Liberal campaign in 1996 at the provincial level was rather weak. It was run by left overs from the old federal Liberal wing of the BC Liberal Party and showed. Cheap quality paper used on their policy book.

Sorry Bill. Negative ads are just too easy to put together 9and PR wonks love them because they are easy to do unless it is profoundly creative. Going on about Christy's idiotic Premiership isn't going to win any more votes than are out there waiting for the NDP now.

Dix would be smart to play it smart with positive ads telling BC voters what he wants to do for the people.

In regards to NOW Communications, it is run by Ron Johnson who is quite a supporter of the NDP, running for them once in 1986, and lost.

Another aspect to negative campaigning is that Big Labour also tends to get into it, such as the BCGEU and HEU, so they end up doing the work for the NDP riding their own issues and bringing those out to the forefront. The BCTF and most notably CUPE does the same thing, so if those complain about the rather silly and idiotic ads from Jim Sheppard which are obviously not working, are these same people going to complain about the ads from Big Labour?

Noticed too that Big Labour did not have alot of negative ads in 1996.

SO one again just the facts, and toss out the PR wonk's happy to do it negative ads.

Let's see what the NDP wants to do for British Columbia.

In other words if the NDP wants governmnt that badly, make them win it, rather than the BC Liberals lose it.

We've seen all there is in regards to Christy Clark's idiocy in governing. How much more does there need to be repeated over and over again ad nauseam? We get it.

Perhaps I missed this but where did all the money collected by the provincial government go while the hst was up and running? I think they had a surplus of revenue that equaled something around $820 million a year. So why has none of that money been put towards the magical $1.6 billion ? I also believe the federal government received something like $300 million a year in surplus revenue from B.C. and I can not figure out how that money was not considered in paying off this debt. I have been looking everywhere to find answers but there is no news coverage. All I can find is Christy clark going on about the $1.6 billion we still apparently owe yet it would seem to me that we have allready earned enough to pay off this debt nearly 2 fold. If anyone knows what's going on with this please let me know thanks!

Perhaps I missed this but where did all the money collected by the provincial government go while the hst was up and running? I think they had a surplus of revenue that equaled something around $820 million a year. So why has none of that money been put towards the magical $1.6 billion ? I also believe the federal government received something like $300 million a year in surplus revenue from B.C. and I can not figure out how that money was not considered in paying off this debt. I have been looking everywhere to find answers but there is no news coverage. All I can find is Christy clark going on about the $1.6 billion we still apparently owe yet it would seem to me that we have allready earned enough to pay off this debt nearly 2 fold. If anyone knows what's going on with this please let me know thanks!

No, there wasn't any surplus at the end. It went to pay back Ottawa as per the agreement to keep the HST intact for x years, but since it was rescinded the money given to BC has to be paid back.

and yes it is owed because it was part of the signed agreement. If people were smart enough to hang on until the expiry of the agreement in about two years, and let the NDP government of the future day rescind the agreement according to what was signed, then there wouldn't have been any additional paybacks.

and no "we" have not earned enough directly off the HST to earn it.

If anyone received an HST rebate cheque, enjoy it. It will be your last.

The GST rebate cheques next year will be significantly lower.

Which will probably mean less extra money for a dinner at a restaurant which may lead to reduce revenues at the restaurant which may lead to the owners controlling costs, which may lead to reduced hours, which may lead to...

Well I do not want to argue, I do know that while the HST was here it did in fact bring in surplus revenue. As to how much as I indicate above those numbers are based on the first year of HST. You seem to know how it all balances. Can you tell me where I can find these values? I.E. How much HST was collected by the federal and provincial government per year

Like Aron , we would all like to know, but sure as heck wont find out till the sleazy BC Liberals are blown out of office. If by some odd circumstances they get another term, we would never find out about a lot of money being spread around to their friends.

Some of you fools above miss the point as usual. CC spends millions of taxpayers money dissing the NDP because there is absolutely NOTHING positive about the Liberals to say. An HST cheque to those who can no longer eat out, and pay their inflated hydro bill is minor compensation for those thousands nearing bankruptcy. At least the big banks are happy with their new SCAB labour.

It is what children do when they don't want to take responsibility for their own actions, which is never. kids are always innocent and it is always the fault of someone else. Since when does the government employees get to pass go, collect six million dollars and get out of jail free?

Since the criminals were fooled into thinking the Libs were Gods gift. These "employees" were't given a "free" pass. Taxpayers were on the hook for this criminal activity. Activity that Dix better get to the bottom of. And all the other criminal activity.3 weeks to go!

Bill Tieleman and Senator Larry Campbell, former Vancouver mayor

Jim Sinclair, Cindy Oliver, Ken Georgetti and Bill Tieleman

Bill Tieleman's coverage of the Basi-Virk/BC Legislature Raid Case praised by other journalists:

"This outstanding piece of journalism, in The Tyee, is the work of a journalist who has been deeply involved with this issue from the start and this article should be passed on as far and wide as possible."

"Bill Tieleman from 24 hours . . . . If you want to know about this trial and about this case, you have to read his blog – I mean, that’s just all there is to it – it’s required reading if you want to understand the BC Legislature Raid situation."

- Mike Smyth, columnist, The Province

"The Basi-Virk case....you’ve probably sat through more of these hearings and gone through more of the files and written about it than any other journalist in the province."

- Bill Good, host, The Bill Good Show, CKNW/Corus Radio Network

"Tieleman ...has done a first-rate job covering the trial."

- Paul Willcocks, columnist, the Victoria Times-Colonist

"Tieleman, who marries a considerable journalistic talent with one of the smartest political minds in the province, has been writing more web-exclusive material. And his coverage of the Basi-Virk trial is a must-read -- whether you're an insider or an outsider."

"24 Hours, the Vancouver paper that has been leading the coverage, as well as the hints of conspiracy in B.C."

- Norman Spector, columnist, Globe and Mail

"Although the major media in this circumstance has been giving the case significant coverage, Tieleman's reports on his blog have been outstanding.

The entire cut and thrust of legal wrangling and arguments has been covered and is accompanied by considered analysis.....His blog site coverage of the Basi-Virk trial is the most in depth treatment of one of British Columbia's biggest political scandals."

- Bill Bell, columnist, The North Shore News

"Mr. Tieleman has published online dispatches which, freed from the limitations of newsprint space or broadcast time, can run at length. They also remain available for those select readers who become obsessed with a case also known as Railgate.....

In another bizarre twist to a story with no shortage of them, Mr. Tieleman went to work one day in December only to discover his office had been ransacked. Bookcases had been tipped over and papers strewn, but nothing was missing.

To top it off, a press kit for the self-published novel The Raid, written by a retired military officer in Metchosin and featuring on its cover a photograph from the 2003 police raid, had been left in a conspicuous place."

- Tom Hawthorn, columnist, The Globe and Mail

Nobody has followed the Basi-Virk affair over its past five years with greater diligence than local journalist, Bill Tieleman....Tieleman deserves our thanks, a fistful of journalism awards and some merit citation for citizenship.